If someone were to hook up a scope to a generator coil and spin the generator really slow,, how much energy is observed per cycle?

If the generator was spun really fast,, how much energy is observed per cycle?

Is the energy per cycle related to the time rate of change of the flux density?

Does a fast change in flux density have more energy than a slow change in flux density?

These are very good questions.The answers to which may help define the time variant electric field properties And the time indifferent magnetic field properties.Something which our current scientific models fail to explain.(My explanation does not fit the current models)

These are very good questions.The answers to which may help define the time variant electric field properties And the time indifferent magnetic field properties.Something which our current scientific models fail to explain.(My explanation does not fit the current models)

The only answers I could find so far,, not that I am looking real hard, is that the faster the rate of change in flux the more energy can be harvested.

Not getting into a bunch of stuff but to keep it real simple,, at least with magnetic induction, Time rate of change which is supposed to be only power is actually an energy potential.

How do you amplify energy in this case? Simple,, allow the rate of change to happen faster.

One way might be if you could "hold" the flux field value constant for a short time while the magnet is moving relative to the coil and then release said flux, so delay the start of the collapse or start of the build and allow the magnet to move further.

IMO there is a difference in behavior between a coil with core and one without, it is like the core removes the flux from the wire and transforms that "electric" current into a "magnetic" current,, so an air core might be a very good choice. I suppose a simple test would be to take a coil and supply it with a closed loop core that you could "open",, pulse charge the coil and then using a voltmeter across the coil ends you open the core,, breaking the "magnetic" current should then provide a voltage reading from the coil when the "magnetic" current is released from the core.

I am not trying to suggest that an air core is the only way to go nor that you need a moving PM,, I do think that if a core is used that the modality of usage will be a little different.

More possible things could look like a motor section that has a longer drive time with a slower flux change whereas the generator section would have the same change in flux but over a shorter time period,, lower voltage in and higher voltage out.

If I pick up a rock on then drop it or if the rock is moving at 1000MPH the rate of change from gravity is the same for all 3 cases, the influence is in the same relative direction even,, on the Earth that rate of change is 9.8m/s/s.

This seems to be a controlled rate of change that is itself controlled by gravity.

What is controlling the rate of change in the flux density? There may be a maximum rate of change, lets say instantly and there may be a zero rate of change and none of this seems to be controlled by the magnetic field.

I look at the magnetic field and it is almost static,, it does not change.

If I could control that that controls the rate of change then what? (not saying I can mind you)

Hi Webby can the rate of change be controlled with different lengths of cores?Tesla said that he used different size cores to delay his coils firing in his motors.I think it is more so not delaying ,but causing them to manifest at the right times.If I fire one coil next to the other ,it causes drag , but fire one at zero degrees ,and the next at 90 degreesthe drag is drastically reduced.But I have four sepperate sets of coils in one embodiment.artv

My observation has been that anything that interacts with the magnetic field can have a cause and effect.

The length of core and or the core material can cause a delay in the propagation of the magnetic field through the core.

Tesla said basically that for his single phase motor he used the delay of communication of the manifested magnetic part from the coils,, they both fired off at the same time but the delay of the longer core had its "strong" moment show up to the rotor a little later.

You can also use different means of interaction together. You can change the permeability of the space between say a PM and coil,, then you can also change the distance of separation,, you can use one way at one time and then the other at another time,,

The whole thing is rather dynamic,, you can change the way the coil reacts which will change the interaction say with a changing permeability of the space between a PM and the coil.

Not to be a stickler, I DO understand your rock analogy.However, the reality of that situation is that once your1000 mph rock enters the earth's atmosphere, it willdrastically be slowed down by wind resistance, to someterminal velocity. This is the point where gravity is cancelled by wind resistance, also the max that your slow rock canaccelerate UP to.

Ultimately, both rocks will travel at the same speed.Which is something like a couple hundred mph.

If the rock were of enough mass, the gravitational acceleration would exactly cancel the gravitational deceleration after it smashed A hole right through the earth and continued through space otherwiseunimpeded.

Those are the only things to be "observed" in yourTheoretical situation of two rocks.

Were we to choose a less extreme velocity to comparegravitational effects, you would "observe" e=mgh Thus negating your entire proposition.We're the rock not to have been launched, then the velocitywould determine that the rock was dropped from a higherpoint than the slow moving rock.

Because of the extreme velocity of your theoretical rockThere is no h at which this would hold true.I.e.- it was launched or already moving that fast from some other source in space. If we know the mass,We can determine what would be observed.

We could suppose us on a planet with no atmosphereAnd thus no resistance to gravitational acceleration But that's more of a though experiment Not something we observe on Earth.Even in space e still = mgh, It's just that the g changes value with distanceLike magnetism in a way

Perform the same "free fall" experiment with 2 magnets.That do not have the restriction of "time" in their equation.What is the final velocity of the moving magnet when it "lands"?

How does the shape of the magnet affect this?Does it matter it faces north or south towards the "ground"?

How would things behave if gravity was "up"?For instance if our moon at the size of Jupiter

We know each of these situations would be different than what weassume things to doBut we cannot observe the answers to any of these questions At least not through conventional means.

Like your rock. We can observe a 9000mph rock entering our atmosphere(Then it is no longer going that fast)Or we could, with enough force, launch a rock at 9000mph.

What we would really observe is the fact that the rock passes32 feet of altitude faster than one second of time.Think about how that applies to the acceleration.While a rock that is moving at 32 feet per second would Receive the full +32 feet/sec faster for that 3 feet of dropthe 9000mph rock would only accelerate 1/1000th of thatAmount over the 1 meter drop.

It would have to fall for one second of time to acceleratethe full 32 feet per second per second.That's roughly 32,000 feet.

You can also use different means of interaction together. You can change the permeability of the space between say a PM and coil,, then you can also change the distance of separation,, you can use one way at one time and then the other at another time,,